Part 5: How do we cure democratic malaise? Up close with some alternatives

If democratic malaise is a serious and growing problem in Canada, particularly in the half of the population under our rising median age, now 42, what can and should be done? Concern with rates of voter decline is muted among those still voting. We see a cleavage on whether this is a serious issue lining up along generational lines.

By way of illustration, a modest majority of all Canadians did not support the decision to leave the Kyoto accord, but opposition dramatically outstripped support among those under the median age, most of whom are not voting.

In older, voting Canada, the sense is that this state of affairs is largely fine and that if you don’t vote, you lose your seat at the table.

In younger, non-voting Canada, however, there is massive mistrust and disagreement with key national decisions. We see that trust in democracy and government is declining to areas which cause one to think about issues of fundamental legitimacy.

[start_gallery][end_gallery]

Click to enlarge.

Clearly, the public is very receptive to moving to some form of proportional representation. Our earlier research has also shown strong support for both mandatory voting and online ballots. So let’s look at some other alternatives. (We note the irony that some of these alternatives may be perpetuating the lower voting rates in younger Canada.)

The decline in trust in government has been led not by eroding trust in parliamentary democracy, bureaucracy, or even elected representatives. In fact, views of political parties have declined even more steeply than trust in other portions of government.

Have political parties have outlived their usefulness? It’s a radical proposition in the sense that there really aren’t any obvious alternatives out there. Nonetheless, only 44 per cent disagree and nearly one-third agreed with 22 per cent undecided. This is less than a stirring endorsement of the political party as the central organizing engine of politics in Canada. Members of the Liberal Party would be well to ponder this rather tenuous connection with voters as they convene.

In fact, the support for political parties is strongest among the supporters of the Liberals and Conservatives. NDP supporters are less convinced of the continued relevance of political parties. Those who endorse the newer parties such as the Green Party and Bloc Québécois are much more likely to consider political parties to be anachronisms.

Many of the groups that are least likely to vote, particularly young Canadians, have scant fealty to the political party system and they seem to be opting out of traditional politics in increasing numbers. In a vicious circle, this cynicism and opting out may end up muting their voices and reinforcing their decision that there is nothing of relevance for them in the world of voting and party politics.

When societal frustrations build to points where the institutional status quo cannot accommodate those tensions, we occasionally see the emergence of social movements. These movements begin outside of the mainstream political world but often will have a major influence on the mainstream political world. Take, for example, the civil rights and antiwar movements of the sixties. There have been more violent and class-rooted social movements in Europe, but as western societies have aged, there have been less frequent and forceful social movements in recent decades.

In past years, we have seen significant new social movements. The Tea Party was almost exclusively a U.S. phenomenon, while Occupy moved outside of the United States during the past year. While neither of these can fairly be compared to the earlier examples, they were both powerful and continue to exert unknown but sizable effects on the political mainstream.

[start_gallery][end_gallery]

Although both Tea Party and Occupy share a fundamental disaffection for the status quo and mainstream politics, they have quite different roots and goals (and some shared ones as well). Without pretending to look at these more complex issues, it is useful to examine how these movements are perceived in terms of basic approval and disapproval. Both movements represent unconventional expressions of the left (Democratic) and right (Republican) parties. Notably, both the Occupy and the Tea Party movements have been explicitly linked to traditional parties and the electoral politics in the United States. In Canada, this is not the case.

[start_gallery][end_gallery]

The older Tea Party movement enjoys the approval of about one-third of Canadians but does much better with many of the same groups it enjoys favour with in the United States (for example, Conservatives, church goers) and it fares much better in Alberta. A majority (63 per cent) holds the movement in negative regard, but this is much more strenuous than the positive sentiments. Negative views are very strong in Quebec, younger Canada and the university educated; all in all not a very favourable outlook.

The Occupy movement is focused on inequality and it finds favourable approval overall by a majority of 60 per cent with 40 per cent negatively disposed. Support is a mirror image of the Tea Party support with strong sympathy in Quebec, non-Conservative supporters, and younger Canada. It is worth noting that we would find voting rates among those who sympathize with the Occupy movement are significantly lower than those who don’t.

These results, and results from the wining national conversations, may bring into question the notion that the Occupy movement has been a failure. It has produced positive resonance with the Canadian public and seems particularly resonant with some of the groups that are most disaffected with traditional politics and their parties. It may also be the case that the allure of non-traditional democratic alternatives may be reinforcing alienation from the mainstream and hence perpetuating non-voting.

[start_gallery][end_gallery]

No force has been more profound in reshaping society, economy and polity than the internet.

Some have argued that the interactive Web 2.0, led by Facebook, Twitter and other social media is having as explosive influence as the first wave of the internet. Basic concepts of community and privacy are being reshaped in unexpected ways and politics has been no exception. Whereas social media are ubiquitous in younger Canada, they are relatively less present in over-45 Canada — a generational fault line that mirrors some of the broader generational tensions we have been discussing.

The survey tests the degree to which new social media were seen as having a positive transformative effect on democracy and politics versus the alternate view that they were distracting and corrosive. In the public’s mind this is no contest. By a margin of three-to-one, the public pick the positive option. We are not so sure they are right.

First of all, this strong majority view strays close to the realm of unanimity in the case of younger Canada. Anecdotally Liberal supporters are equally positive while Conservatives are less enthusiastic.

We find it mildly curious that such uncritical blanket optimism for this new form of alternative democracy, particularly in younger Canada, coexists with such dismal levels of confidence in politics and democracy. Given the increased stranglehold that older Canada is exerting over politics and the large gap in the priorities and values of older and younger Canada, it must be the case that this optimism is directed to future fruition rather than established achievements.

Just as social media have been exploding this growing disconnection of younger Canada from the political sphere has been worsening. It was Neil Postman who argued in Amusing Ourselves to Death that Huxley’s future dystopia was more prescient than Orwell’s 1984.

At the heart of the differences was a society where trivial and idle amusement were disconnecting citizens from controlling their own future and interest. Social media may well achieve the enormous promise citizens place in it, but the record so far would suggest the results look closer to the amusing ourselves to death concept than seizing our future.